Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Mental illness

Page 3 of 5 [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

How should mental illness be defined?
Significant deviation in behavior from social norms or social ideals 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
Significantly anti-social behavior 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Significantly perverse-seeming behavior 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
Any neurological condition that is linked to deviation from social norms or social ideals 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
Any neurological condition that is linked to anti-social behavior 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
Any neurological condition that is linked to perverse-seeming behavior 8%  8%  [ 2 ]
Equal to, or a result of extreme spiritual sickness or demonic possession 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Mental illness does not or cannot properly exist 13%  13%  [ 3 ]
Illness does not or cannot properly exist 13%  13%  [ 3 ]
Other 50%  50%  [ 12 ]
Total votes : 24

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Feb 2009, 8:42 pm

twoshots wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Any behavior non conducive to the flourishing (health, happiness, success, &c) of the organism should be deemed ill.

So, most soldiers are ill. Good to know.

Sorry, forgot to add "acting in the interests of the state/society" to "flourishing"... :twisted:

Right, well, it is actually important, as from what I've read, the ability to push back self-interest in a situation for social good is usually considered a part of mental wellness. This was in a book from like the 50s by a psychoanalyst, but still important.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Feb 2009, 8:56 pm

claire333 wrote:
Ok then, I will stick to the topic of mental health. I agree, to some extent, that the health professional should consider the individual. However, I cannot understand how you would think the organism is inconsequential. Most anyone would conclude, a person with suacidal thoughts and cuts themselves is suffering from mental illness. They might be prescribed a medication which causes them to feel lethargic, gain weight, and suffer from impotance. This medication could make them very unsatisfied as an individual. However, if the physician sees the medication has halted the suicidal thoughts and self-destruction, they could conclude the medication to be sucessful because it is preserving the organism.

Hey, why do you say that I am mentally ill!? :P

In any case, I dunno that I see a reason to necessarily consider them ill, I mean, we do not know the circumstances, or reasons of the individual. I mean, it would seem that if someone was ill, the illness wouldn't be a specific symptom, but rather a psychological process/failure in a psychological process, and once we get into the matter of psychological processes the issue of wrongful deviance from normal psychological processes pops up.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Feb 2009, 9:06 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Because that is the nomenclature that is attached to it; I don't think such terms are really used systematically.

There are also occasional calls for a cure for autism, so I don't think it is simply nomenclature but rather reflective of some thinking.

The calls for a cure to autism are more commonly from uneducated laypersons, whose opinions can be safely rejected as meaningless. Well, officially it's not Asperger's Syndrome but Asperger's Disorder, and disorders are considered distinct from illnesses I think.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Feb 2009, 9:07 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Hey, why do you say that I am mentally ill!? :P

Obviously, because you are! :P


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

04 Feb 2009, 9:23 pm

Orwell wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Because that is the nomenclature that is attached to it; I don't think such terms are really used systematically.

There are also occasional calls for a cure for autism, so I don't think it is simply nomenclature but rather reflective of some thinking.

The calls for a cure to autism are more commonly from uneducated laypersons, whose opinions can be safely rejected as meaningless. Well, officially it's not Asperger's Syndrome but Asperger's Disorder, and disorders are considered distinct from illnesses I think.

I have not heard such a distinction made. What could be the foundation? Schizophrenia is as ill as anyone can be, but it seems to exist on a continuum with the personality disorder schizotypal, related at least be genetics and certain associations. Maybe we might argue that personality disorders aren't really disorders in whatever sense we mean them, but how can this distinction be drawn?


_________________
* here for the nachos.


claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

04 Feb 2009, 9:43 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Hey, why do you say that I am mentally ill!? :P
It takes one to know one...I guess. :wink:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
In any case, I dunno that I see a reason to necessarily consider them ill, I mean, we do not know the circumstances, or reasons of the individual. I mean, it would seem that if someone was ill, the illness wouldn't be a specific symptom, but rather a psychological process/failure in a psychological process, and once we get into the matter of psychological processes the issue of wrongful deviance from normal psychological processes pops up.
But the fact is, circumstances that are usually defined as reasons why, when considering phychological processes are generally wrong. Experimental psychology tends to prove this. People tend to assign reason based on biased preconcieved notions on how the mind works. The most instrospective people are the most likely to suffer from self-doubt and depression, and are most times wrong in their self-analysis. This is also often true of psychiatric professionals. A person can learn more about themselves spending a summer backpacking across the country than they can in five years on the couch of a psychiatrist.



asplanet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,258
Location: Cyberspace, New Zealand

04 Feb 2009, 9:49 pm

What one sees as mental could be another moment of pure genius to another, I see mental illness as a label to get everyone to conform, control difference, if we do not step outside, push boundaries the world would stay static


_________________
Face Book "Alyson Fiona Bradley "


claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

04 Feb 2009, 9:50 pm

twoshots wrote:
I have not heard such a distinction made. What could be the foundation? Schizophrenia is as ill as anyone can be, but it seems to exist on a continuum with the personality disorder schizotypal, related at least be genetics and certain associations. Maybe we might argue that personality disorders aren't really disorders in whatever sense we mean them, but how can this distinction be drawn?
I might have to side with Orwell on this one. Illness impies a state of being unhealthy or unwell, while disorder implies a lack of order or disturbance of order. I will have to refer back to my original response, since I find many things in the DSM could be considered mental defects, rather than things that are unhealthy, or cause disorder, in a person's mental process.



twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

04 Feb 2009, 9:56 pm

claire333 wrote:
twoshots wrote:
I have not heard such a distinction made. What could be the foundation? Schizophrenia is as ill as anyone can be, but it seems to exist on a continuum with the personality disorder schizotypal, related at least be genetics and certain associations. Maybe we might argue that personality disorders aren't really disorders in whatever sense we mean them, but how can this distinction be drawn?
I might have to side with Orwell on this one. Illness impies a state of being unhealthy or unwell, while disorder implies a lack of order or disturbance of order. I will have to refer back to my original response, since I find many things in the DSM could be considered mental defects, rather than things that are unhealthy, or cause disorder, in a person's mental process.

Well, that really comes down to what the difference between a disturbance of order and being unhealthy is. Anyway, they're often all lumped under one roof as far as I can tell.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

04 Feb 2009, 9:58 pm

twoshots wrote:
Well, that really comes down to what the difference between a disturbance of order and being unhealthy is. Anyway, they're often all lumped under one roof as far as I can tell.
Yeah, that is why they are all lumped together into the same stupid book, which really ticks me off...but I guess that is my own personal issue. :lol:



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Feb 2009, 11:07 pm

claire333 wrote:
But the fact is, circumstances that are usually defined as reasons why, when considering phychological processes are generally wrong. Experimental psychology tends to prove this. People tend to assign reason based on biased preconcieved notions on how the mind works. The most instrospective people are the most likely to suffer from self-doubt and depression, and are most times wrong in their self-analysis. This is also often true of psychiatric professionals. A person can learn more about themselves spending a summer backpacking across the country than they can in five years on the couch of a psychiatrist.

Well, circumstances cannot be the same as illness as they are different than fundamental processes, I mean, you aren't really ill if you feel bad after holding your breath, you are just suffering the natural conclusions of holding your breath.

As for your point about introspection, it is also a fact that most people's views of their own beliefs and abilities are inflated. As well, i think that most people are wrong at most times about most things in general, period. Why would we hold psychological beliefs to a supremely higher standard?



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Feb 2009, 11:13 pm

twoshots wrote:
Well, that really comes down to what the difference between a disturbance of order and being unhealthy is. Anyway, they're often all lumped under one roof as far as I can tell.

I agree with you there, and this kind of thinking is implicit in my poll options I think.



claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

04 Feb 2009, 11:20 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Well, circumstances cannot be the same as illness as they are different than fundamental processes, I mean, you aren't really ill if you feel bad after holding your breath, you are just suffering the natural conclusions of holding your breath.

As for your point about introspection, it is also a fact that most people's views of their own beliefs and abilities are inflated. As well, i think that most people are wrong at most times about most things in general, period. Why would we hold psychological beliefs to a supremely higher standard?
I think we should not. I have to log off for now, but am looking foward to continuing this conversation tomorrow. I will respond to your point on circumstances then, and would like to hear your own answer to your poll and original post.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,893
Location: Stendec

04 Feb 2009, 11:24 pm

They're Coming to Take Me Away, HAH-HAH!


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Feb 2009, 11:32 pm

claire333 wrote:
I think we should not. I have to log off for now, but am looking foward to continuing this conversation tomorrow. I will respond to your point on circumstances then, and would like to hear your own answer to your poll and original post.

My own answer to my poll and original post? Illness, mental or non-mental, is a category error. It, by it's nature, presupposes a point of wellness and proper order. Proper order is a referent to a teleological fact, and I claim that teleology is an error for it demands a world of purposive creation. Thus, all illness can reduce to is a personally or socially unliked condition of body or mind and because as a rule, I dislike considering social ideas to be valuable, all claims of illness are a brute assertion onto the world.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

05 Feb 2009, 2:48 am

It is worthwhile considering who is insane and who is not. Paranoid schizophrenics probably act logically as to what they believe although what they believe has very little to do with reality. Nazis who killed Jews also had quite distorted views of reality as do many Jews who massacre Palestinians for no reason other than they are not Jews. I find most people with strong religious beliefs believe in quite extraordinary ideas that have no basis in perceptual reality. Children who accept fantasy as real also might be included in that category as well as people with basic mental lacks such as extremely low IQ or sufferers from Alzheimer's. I wonder how many of these might be considered insane.